State ex rel. Alicea v. Krichbaum
This text of 2010 Ohio 3234 (State ex rel. Alicea v. Krichbaum) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the complaint of appellant, Clemente Alicea, for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas Judge R. Scott Krichbaum, to hold a new sentencing hearing. Alicea claims that his 1999 sentencing entry was not a final, appealable order because it did not include any indication of the manner of his conviction as required by Crim.R. 32(C).
{¶ 2} Alicea’s claim lacks merit for two reasons. First, the remedy for a failure to comply with Crim.R. 32(C) is a revised sentencing entry rather than a new hearing. State ex rel. Culgan v. Medina Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 119 Ohio St.3d 535, 2008-Ohio-4609, 895 N.E.2d 805, ¶ 8-10. Second, Alicea’s sentencing entry fully complied with Crim.R. 32(C) and State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 2008-0hio-3330, 893 N.E.2d 163, syllabus. The entry specified that Alicea was found guilty of rape after a jury trial. Therefore, the sentencing entry constituted a final, appealable order, and Alicea is not entitled to a new sentencing entry. State ex rel. Pruitt v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 125 Ohio St.3d 402, 2010-Ohio-1808, 928 N.E.2d 722.
{¶ 3} Therefore, the court of appeals properly dismissed Alicea’s complaint for a writ of mandamus.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2010 Ohio 3234, 126 Ohio St. 3d 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-alicea-v-krichbaum-ohio-2010.